> Felix Rawlings wrote:
>> That stuff is old, and from Intel. The claim was from HP, and the numbers
>> quoted imply some 257000 CPU cycles for the 1024-bit private key
>> decryption operation, on a single core CPU. Like I said, it was posted
>> here a couple of years ago.
>
> Care to provide a link? Googling the web and sci.crypt has NOT turned
> up anything that contradicts what I've said so far.

Like I said, it was somebody posting here.

> I don't see what the point your posts serve. I'm just presenting what
> a dual-threaded approach can do. If you're claiming that [effectively]
> custom logic can do better well then "duh" is my response.

I am merely pointing out that there are reports concerning the
performance delivered by Itanium 2 in this area. In that light, it is
worth the while noticing that software running on a single core Itanium 2
processor delivers roughly the same performance as dual core Athlon
running at a CPU frequency over twice as fast as Itanium 2's. That's all I
am saying.

Quite frankly, I am surprised at your touchy reaction. I am just
illustrating what kind of performance each of these two particular
architectures has so far been able to deliver on this particular problem.

Re: Multi Core CPUs... together it would be equal the power of a single core CPU?...Core Duo 1.73Ghz = 3.46Ghz single core ... 10 people talking at 20 decibals doesn't give you 200 decibals of ...(uk.comp.homebuilt)

Re: Multi Core CPUs... together it would be equal the power of a single core CPU?...Core Duo 1.73Ghz = 3.46Ghz single core ... 10 people talking at 20 decibals doesn't give you 200 decibals of ...(uk.comp.homebuilt)

Re: TFM + RSA + Dual Core :-)...Tom St Denis wrote: ... So single core they get 1250/sec and with four processors ... 1/2.75x the price of the AMD64 4200+ dual core. ... can't do that for Itanium....(sci.crypt)